I would probably say worse,

@Cornwallis There was a very interesting thread on best bids for OOB at
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/41788/bids?_=1774822678885

Lots of ideas there.

Personally, I’m not a fan of Taranto as the Allies lose lots of material to force Italy to stay home. This allows/forces them to do what I feel is the optimal Axis strategy: support the German advance by preventing weak Russian blockers and protect the Western front.

I do like a sub in SZ91 to protect the cruiser and then be the sacrificial unit to attack the Italian DD+transport with 1 tac + 1 ftr.

The Yunnan stack is a very interesting option:
1 inf Yunnan
1 ftrs in Moscow + Volgograd
R1 DOW, send all 3 ftr + tac to Yunnan, the Japanese cannot really attack 15-85% battle.
Once the Chinese are up and running, the ftrs can go back home to protect.
If you do this, I would also add marine to India as it allows them to capture 1 more territory early. But beware, the Japanese might be forced to DOW J1 since they really cannot take anything else.

There is also the controversial bid placement 1 ANZAC inf New Guinea. This is allowed in some cases, but generally the rule is that the territory must have a unit in it prior to adding a unit. However, it does significantly help the ANZACs take Dutch New Guinea without needing a transport. Discuss with your opponent to get their view. Perhaps it would be allowed but there would be an additional cost to allow (6-10 IPCs?)

Regarding KGF vs KJF. My general plan is a) save my capitals that are under attack – i.e., is London, India and, New South Wales safe?
b) stop the Italian growth in the Med as this can get out of hand quickly if unchecked.
c) Stop the Japanese. The Germans can get large but taking Egypt is hard. If the Allies own the rest of the board, the economy stay in the Allies favor if the Japanese and DEI are contested.

@MindBlownAstronaut said in Rule clarification:

Lets say that Britain on their turn deploys a destroyer into a sea zone that has a german sub. On frances turn could they take a fighter and attack the subs? So that then in that battle there is a British destroyer and French fighter attacking a german sub. Would that work is is that not allowed, couldn’t find it in the rules.

Definitely not allowed. While multiple powers can defend together in the same square only the active power’s pieces are usable during the active Player’s Turn.

In essence, the British destroyer is completely ignored.

@SeaYa

Agreed.

Thanks - this was the critical context:

G2: 10 tanks in Romania
G3: 6 tanks in Romania pay off $20 in damage
G4: start building tanks in Berlin to avoid paying $20 to repair factory

Traded border areas a couple times and then full on retreat to Moscow began leaving single inf to slow Germany down

On G5 Germany has massive stack of tanks and mechs and some infantry with a lot of bombers a couple spaces back with smaller army from Bryansk.

The value of infantry in lieu of bombers, wins out. Changing a battle calc from 30inf, 2 art, 2 tank, 2 fight, 1 tac, 8 bombers to 60 inf, 0 bomber, all else equal, boosts the %win from mid 65 to 97 when going against 5 inf, 15 mech, 20 tanks, no AAA (1st scenario drops to 37% with 2 AAA defending. I think this is why all the pushback. I agree, against a stalled out German attack (the trading border territories you mentioned) the bombers would indeed help manage dead zones for max German inf loss, preserving Soviet territory. However, advanced German players will rarely, if ever, have a stalled out attack, and will not be trading territories on the border for multiple rounds.

@dazedwit

It took a month but this game finally ended on J14

Axis were setting up to have Ottawa be final victory city but Russia liberated Cairo so had to keep going until Japan took out San Francisco

@Booper Thanks, yes I was looking over some league games to get an idea.

Thank you! That makes sense. That’ll make a mess for uk to deal with lol.